“This is a ban against single pickets” – a human rights activist about the law signed by Putin prohibiting rallies almost everywhere

The task is to reduce the opportunities for exercising the right to freedom of assembly. While we had the ECtHR, we had to listen to it [the authorities] at least to some extent, and such regional laws were repeatedly adopted, but challenged, and sometimes they were able to cancel them. By establishing large prohibition zones [nearby] from a large number of objects, you can actually ban public events anywhere – throughout the entire territory of the settlement, which happened. It's a move in that direction.

By and large, these bans are aimed precisely at single pickets, because all other events are supposed to have an approval procedure. In fact, this is permission, in terms of power, but this permission is rather vague. So they take advantage of this – and for completely arbitrary and ridiculous, legal and illegal reasons, they prohibit any activities that require approval. Single pickets could theoretically be held everywhere, because they do not require approval. And [such solo actions were safe for the picketer] if they did not fall under the "discredit" of the armed forces and under covid restrictions. Now the space for holding even single pickets has been narrowed. The practical consequence now lies precisely in this – in those regions where covid restrictions have been lifted, there is even less opportunity for single-person pickets, because everything else could not be held anywhere. If they can, under a more plausible pretext, prohibit freedom of assembly, then it’s more convenient for them, and it doesn’t look ridiculous, as it is now with covid.

The authorities do not want to be an eyesore even by single picketers, but, on the other hand, another recent trend is the sacralization of traditional values. Apparently, [the ban on pickets near churches] is a sign of respect for the church and strengthening the sacred status of religious sites, and as for schools, on the one hand, the state declares the inadmissibility of involving children in politics, in particular, by their opponents, on the other hand, they themselves involve children in an active way.

Exit mobile version